PR7: Remove global Onyx reference from getOriginalReportID by cretadn22 · Pull Request #96669 · Expensify/App

cretadn22 · 2026-07-21T17:53:18Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #66419
PROPOSAL: #66419

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

Go to any chat
Hover over any message
Add an emoji reaction, then click the emoji again to remove it
Verify that adding and clearing the reaction works as expected

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-07-28.at.00.39.10.mov

melvin-bot · 2026-07-21T17:53:24Z

@situchan Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 2cc87765ad

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

… ensuring consistency across the codebase

codecov · 2026-07-27T17:32:13Z

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...nents/Reactions/ReportActionItemEmojiReactions.tsx	`48.38% <100.00%> (+1.72%)`	⬆️
src/libs/ReportUtils.ts	`86.67% <100.00%> (-0.03%)`	⬇️
src/libs/actions/EmojiReactions.ts	`93.93% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts	`72.12% <100.00%> (+0.04%)`	⬆️
...report/ContextMenu/BaseReportActionContextMenu.tsx	`86.14% <ø> (ø)`
...ort/ContextMenu/PopoverReportActionContextMenu.tsx	`44.49% <ø> (ø)`
...pages/inbox/report/ReportActionItemMessageEdit.tsx	`58.33% <100.00%> (+0.23%)`	⬆️
...rt/ReportActionCompose/ComposerWithSuggestions.tsx	`61.20% <60.00%> (-0.10%)`	⬇️
...es/inbox/report/ContextMenu/ContextMenuActions.tsx	`39.53% <25.00%> (ø)`
... and 22 files with indirect coverage changes

…oserWithSuggestions

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ebc9743265

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

situchan · 2026-07-27T17:47:14Z

job 2, typescript failing

cretadn22 · 2026-07-28T16:35:19Z

@situchan The PR is ready

MelvinBot · 2026-07-31T18:11:13Z

Review

Looks good — this is a clean, correct continuation of the "remove global Onyx from getOriginalReportID" refactor. I traced every caller and the wiring is consistent. No blocking issues.

What changed: getOriginalReportID drops the reportActionsParam ?? allReportActions?.[…] fallback, so callers must now thread in the report's actions. toggleEmojiReaction, deleteReportComment, and saveReportActionDraft grow a reportActions param and pass it through.

Verified:

All 13 getOriginalReportID callers pass an explicit reportActions — none rely on the removed global fallback.
At every call site the reportActions argument matches the reportID argument (e.g. ReportActionItemEmojiReactions, PopoverReportActionContextMenu both key off the same reportID). Since the global cache and useOnyx(REPORT_ACTIONS + reportID) both resolve to the same collection, behavior is preserved.
The context-menu payload is built once in BaseReportActionContextMenu and feeds both renderContent and onPress, so reportActions/originalReportActions reach the emoji toggle and the edit action.
deleteReportComment correctly keeps originalReportActions for whisper-hiding and uses the new reportActions only for getOriginalReportID — the added param comments match the actual usage.
All test callers (ReportTest, AttachmentTest, UnreadIndicatorsTest) were updated to the new arity.

Minor observations (non-blocking)

The editAction fallback originalReportID ?? reportID paired with originalReportActions ?? reportActions is safe: even in the mixed case (using originalReportID but falling back to reportActions), getOriginalReportID still resolves to originalReportID because the parent action is present in reportActions.
Behavioral tradeoff inherent to this refactor series: useOnyx can briefly return undefined before hydration, whereas the old global cache was eagerly populated. In practice these interactions (react/edit/delete) only fire once the report's actions are loaded and rendered, so this shouldn't regress — just flagging it as the one place the two sources aren't identical.

I did not run typecheck/CI locally; the automated checks on the PR remain the source of truth for that.

MelvinBot · 2026-07-31T18:16:36Z

Potential regression found

Draft auto-save while editing a message can silently stop working in active reports.

In ComposerWithSuggestions.tsx:290-297 this PR adds reportActions to the dependency array of the useCallback that is fed into useDebouncedSaveDraft:

const {saveDraft: debouncedSaveReportActionDraft} = useDebouncedSaveDraft(
    useCallback(
        (comment) => saveReportActionDraft(reportID, editingReportAction, reportActions, comment),
        [reportID, editingReportAction, reportActions], // reportActions is new
    ),
);

reportActions comes from useOnyx(REPORT_ACTIONS + reportID), so its reference changes on any report-action activity (new message, reaction, read receipt, optimistic update, Pusher event). Every time it changes, the useCallback gets a new identity, which makes useDebounce's effect re-run and cancel() the pending debounced save without rescheduling it. useDebounce's own docstring warns about exactly this: "Every time the identity of any of the arguments changes, the debounce operation will restart (canceling any ongoing debounce)… pass stable references."

The debounce window is 1000ms. So in a busy report, if a report action arrives within 1s of the user's last keystroke, the queued draft-save is dropped. Before this PR the closure depended only on [reportID, editingReportAction] (stable during an edit), so the save fired reliably.

Repro: open a high-traffic chat, start editing a message, type, pause, and while another message/reaction lands in that report (<1s), navigate away or reload before typing again → the in-progress edit is not persisted as a draft. This defeats the stated purpose of the debounced save ("allows one to navigate somewhere else and come back to the comment and still have it in edit mode").

Suggested fix: keep the debounced callback identity stable — read the latest reportActions through a ref inside the callback (updated via useEffect) instead of adding it to the dependency array, so the debounce isn't reset on every report-action change. The same applies to the handleKeyPress/onSelectionChange useCallbacks that gained reportActions in their deps.

Other things I checked (no functional regression)

getOriginalReportID branch changes: No regression. The removed global fallback was allReportActions[reportID]; every updated caller now passes useOnyx(REPORT_ACTIONS + reportID) for the same reportID, which is the identical collection. I verified the reportID/reportActions pairing holds at all sites, including the originalReportID ?? reportID / originalReportActions ?? reportActions fallback in ContextMenuActions.tsx:628 (both paths resolve to the same result).
useOnyx hydration timing: during the brief pre-hydration window reportActions is undefined, but for the common (non-thread-parent, non-transaction-thread) message this converges to the same reportID the old path returned, so no user-visible change.
Secondary (perf, not correctness): ReportActionItemEmojiReactions.tsx:82 now subscribes each reaction row to the whole REPORT_ACTIONS collection just to resolve the original report ID on click, so every reaction row re-renders on any report-action change. Consider resolving it lazily inside the click handler instead of subscribing.

I analyzed this from the code; I did not runtime-verify the draft-loss repro. Confidence: medium-high on the mechanism.

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: dd4f9140b1

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-07-31T18:17:02Z

+                saveReportActionDraft(reportID, editingReportAction, reportActions, comment);
            },
-            [reportID, editingReportAction],
+            [reportID, editingReportAction, reportActions],


Keep edit-draft debounce independent of report actions

Including the whole reportActions object in this debounced callback makes any report-action Onyx update in the active chat (for example, another message arriving or being edited) recreate the callback; useDebounce cancels the pending trailing call whenever its func changes. In narrow-layout edit mode, if that happens within the draft-save debounce window after the user types and they then navigate away or reload, the latest edit draft is never written to Onyx, so keep the debounced saver stable and pass/resolve the needed owner actions without depending on the mutable collection.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

situchan · 2026-07-31T18:17:20Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: HybridApp
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: HybridApp
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

android2.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

ios2.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web2.mov

situchan · 2026-07-31T18:31:19Z

Regression Test Cases

Emoji reactions (toggleEmojiReaction)

Go to any chat, hover a message, add an emoji reaction, then click the same emoji to remove it → reaction adds and clears correctly.
Open a thread (reply to a message, enter the thread). Add and remove a reaction on the thread's parent message shown at the top → reaction adds/removes and persists after leaving and re-entering the thread.
On a money-request/expense report, add a reaction to the request preview message → reaction applies to the correct message.
React while offline, then go back online → the reaction syncs; no duplicate or orphaned reaction.

Editing a message + draft persistence (saveReportActionDraft)

Edit a sent message, type some text, then close the edit and reopen it → the drafted (unsent) edit is still there.
Edit the parent message of a thread from inside the thread, type, navigate away, come back → the edit draft is preserved under the correct message.
Busy-report draft check (regression-sensitive): In a high-traffic chat (or have a second account send messages), start editing a message, type a few words, pause ~1–2s while new messages/reactions arrive in that report, then navigate away and back without typing again → the in-progress edit must still be saved as a draft. (This is the debounce-cancel scenario; verify the draft isn't lost.)
Repeat step 7 on mWeb / narrow layout (inline edit in the composer), which is the path that uses the debounced save.

Deleting a comment (deleteReportComment)

Delete a normal comment in a chat → it's removed and the LHN last-message preview updates correctly.
Delete a comment that has an actionable mention whisper attached (e.g. mention a user not in the room, then delete that message) → the associated whisper is also hidden/removed.
Delete the parent message of a thread → the thread reflects the deletion correctly.
Delete a comment while offline, then reconnect → deletion syncs without error.

Priority focus: Steps 7 and 8 target the one real regression risk (debounced edit-draft save being cancelled in active reports). Steps 2, 6, 11 cover thread-parent resolution, which is where the removed global fallback mattered most. If the debounce fix is applied, re-verify 7–8 specifically.

situchan · 2026-08-02T10:18:46Z

@cretadn22 please address above comments.
The debounce regressions AI reported are edge-cases so I don't think we should block on this.

…component to simplify parameters and improve readability. Remove unnecessary comments in deleteReportComment function.

cretadn22 · 2026-08-03T15:35:25Z

@codex review

situchan · 2026-08-03T15:36:10Z

@MelvinBot review

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-08-03T15:42:02Z

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Breezy!

Reviewed commit: b71a299344

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

MelvinBot · 2026-08-03T15:46:28Z

Re-review — the flagged regression is fixed ✅

The debounce regression I raised earlier has been correctly addressed in b71a299, and all CI checks are green (typecheck, React Compiler Compliance, and all test jobs pass). No blocking issues.

How the fix resolves it: ComposerWithSuggestions.tsx:290 now passes the stable module-level saveReportActionDraft import straight into useDebouncedSaveDraft and threads reportID, editingReportAction, reportActions in at call time, instead of closing over reportActions in a useCallback. Because the debounced func identity is now stable, useDebounce's [func] effect no longer re-runs and cancel()s the pending save on every report-action change. This is exactly the pattern already used by ReportActionItemMessageEdit.tsx:158, so it's the idiomatic fix. lodash-debounce's trailing invocation uses the args from the latest call, so the newest reportActions/comment are still what gets persisted. 👍

Verification detail & remaining minor notes (non-blocking)

Correctness of the pattern: The wrapper arrow function inside useDebouncedSaveDraftImpl is stable only because React Compiler memoizes it (the documented reason for the "non-generic implementation" note). This is the same production-proven dependency ReportActionItemMessageEdit already relies on, and React Compiler Compliance passes on this PR, so it holds here.
Cosmetic: b71a299 also drops the two param-description comments in deleteReportComment (originalReportActions vs reportActions). Those two params are easy to mix up, so I'd lean toward keeping a one-line note there — purely optional.
Still open (perf, not correctness — same as before): ReportActionItemEmojiReactions.tsx:82 still subscribes every reaction row to the whole REPORT_ACTIONS collection just to resolve the original report ID on click, so each row re-renders on any report-action change. Could be resolved lazily inside the click handler. Not a regression, fine to defer.
getOriginalReportID rewiring: unchanged since my earlier review and still correct — every caller passes useOnyx(REPORT_ACTIONS + reportID) for the same reportID the removed global fallback used.

Runtime check: I tried to smoke-test the emoji-reaction add/remove and edit-draft-persist happy paths on web, but couldn't — those flows are gated behind a message-row hover, and the web driver has no hover/long-press/right-click primitive, so the UI never surfaced. This is a test-tooling limitation, not a code concern; the assessment above is from code analysis + green CI.

I agree with situchan's earlier call that the original debounce concern was edge-case-y and shouldn't block — and it's now been fixed outright regardless.

MelvinBot · 2026-08-03T15:59:01Z

Regression sweep — no new regressions found ✅

I traced every path this PR touches. The one real regression previously flagged (debounced edit-draft save being cancelled in busy reports) has been fixed in b71a299, and all CI is green. Everything else resolves identically to the pre-PR behavior. Remaining items are perf/cosmetic only.

Why the core change is safe: getOriginalReportID dropped the global allReportActions fallback, so correctness now depends on every caller passing a reportActions collection keyed to the same reportID. I checked all five production call sites and that invariant holds at each one:

Call-site-by-call-site verification

ReportActionItemEmojiReactions.tsx:82 → reportActions and reportID are the same key. ✓
ComposerWithSuggestions.tsx:274 (both edit-draft paths + the ArrowUp/backspace saveReportActionDraft) → same key. ✓
ReportActionItemMessageEdit.tsx:94 → same key. ✓
ContextMenuActions.tsx emoji-toggle passes reportActions (the viewed report's actions) + reportID; the edit action uses the originalReportID ?? reportID / originalReportActions ?? reportActions pair. Both resolve correctly even in the mixed fallback case — for a thread-parent action, getOriginalReportID returns the parent via the report's parentReportID (Onyx report data), independent of which actions object is passed. ✓
PopoverReportActionContextMenu.tsx delete: both report (L347) and reportActions (L69) come from the same reportIDRef.current, and originalReportActions (used only for whisper-hiding) is unchanged. ✓

Cases I explicitly checked for divergence from the old global-fallback behavior — all match:

Normal message: action is in reportActions[reportID] → returns reportID. Same as before.
Thread-parent message (viewed from the thread): action is absent from the thread's own actions, so the isThreadReportParentAction branch returns parentReportID. Correct — and this actually requires passing the viewed report's actions (not the parent's), which the emoji/delete paths do. Covered by the new tests in ReportTest/ReportUtilsTest.
One-transaction expense report: getOneTransactionThreadReportID receives the same full report actions it did via the global before, so it resolves the transaction thread identically.
withDEWRoutedActionsObject selector on the context-menu reportActions (BaseReportActionContextMenu.tsx:178) is additive only (injects synthetic routed actions, never removes real ones), so the reportActions[reportActionID] presence check is never broken by it.
Onyx hydration window: if reportActions is briefly undefined, a normal message still returns reportID (the not-found branch falls through to reportID), and these interactions only fire after the report's actions are rendered anyway.

Remaining non-blocking items (unchanged from prior review)

Perf (not a regression): ReportActionItemEmojiReactions.tsx:82 subscribes every reaction row to the whole REPORT_ACTIONS collection just to resolve the original report ID on click, so each row re-renders on any report-action change. Could be resolved lazily inside the click handler.
Cosmetic: b71a299 removed the two param-description comments distinguishing originalReportActions from reportActions in deleteReportComment — those two params are easy to confuse, so a one-line note there wouldn't hurt.
Note: a richer useOriginalReportID hook already exists and verifies transaction-thread membership more strictly than the legacy getOriginalReportID being edited here. Not in scope for this PR, but worth keeping in mind for the rest of the refactor series.

Runtime check: I couldn't drive these flows on web — reactions/edit/delete are all reached through a hover-revealed toolbar, and the ArrowUp/Escape edit path needs raw key events; the web test driver supports neither. So the assessment above is from code analysis + the green test suite (which includes the new thread-parent and one-transaction unit tests for exactly these paths).

Bottom line: the debounce regression is fixed, and I found no further regressions in the getOriginalReportID rewiring. Good to go from a regression standpoint.

situchan · 2026-08-03T16:00:22Z

@cretadn22 are all comments addressed? Please pull main

cretadn22 · 2026-08-03T16:33:28Z

@situchan All requested updates are in place and ready for review

github-actions · 2026-08-04T09:40:16Z

🚧 mollfpr has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

github-actions · 2026-08-04T09:46:34Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #96669.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-7a99624dd9e-a84bac1-b8a337189c09db2e5804a2d0ed76d156eac18161/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-7a99624-a84bac1-d0099ff6d777d0455dea1da00f6ae6bc39e5668f/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://96669.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-08-04T09:47:04Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

getOriginalReportID

2cc8776

cretadn22 requested review from a team as code owners July 21, 2026 17:53

melvin-bot Bot assigned cretadn22 Jul 21, 2026

melvin-bot Bot requested review from heyjennahay and situchan and removed request for a team July 21, 2026 17:53

melvin-bot Bot removed request for a team and heyjennahay July 21, 2026 17:53

cretadn22 marked this pull request as draft July 21, 2026 17:53

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jul 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/pages/inbox/report/ReportActionCompose/ComposerWithSuggestions.tsx Outdated

github-actions Bot reviewed Jul 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/components/Reactions/ReportActionItemEmojiReactions.tsx Outdated

cretadn22 added 2 commits July 27, 2026 22:29

merge main into refactor/66419-finish-getOriginalReportID

884e1f4

Updated function signatures to require instead of making it optional,…

45b2b9f

… ensuring consistency across the codebase

utilize reportActions directly, improving draft saving logic in Comp…

ebc9743

…oserWithSuggestions

cretadn22 marked this pull request as ready for review July 27, 2026 17:41

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jul 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/components/Reactions/ReportActionItemEmojiReactions.tsx

merge main into refactor/66419-finish-getOriginalReportID

5994070

cretadn22 added 2 commits July 30, 2026 00:20

Merge branch 'main' into refactor/66419-finish-getOriginalReportID

a3f498c

Merge branch 'main' into refactor/66419-finish-getOriginalReportID

dd4f914

situchan reviewed Jul 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts Outdated

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jul 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

situchan reviewed Jul 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/pages/inbox/report/ReportActionCompose/ComposerWithSuggestions.tsx Outdated

Refactor report action draft saving logic in ComposerWithSuggestions …

b71a299

…component to simplify parameters and improve readability. Remove unnecessary comments in deleteReportComment function.

cretadn22 added 2 commits August 3, 2026 23:07

Merge branch 'main' into refactor/66419-finish-getOriginalReportID

d7eb177

Merge branch 'main' into refactor/66419-finish-getOriginalReportID

9cc5499

situchan approved these changes Aug 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from mollfpr August 3, 2026 16:34

mollfpr approved these changes Aug 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

mollfpr merged commit 7a99624 into Expensify:main Aug 4, 2026
35 checks passed

Uh oh!

Conversation

cretadn22 commented Jul 21, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 21, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jul 27, 2026 • edited by github-actions Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

situchan commented Jul 27, 2026

Uh oh!

cretadn22 commented Jul 28, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jul 31, 2026

Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jul 31, 2026

Potential regression found

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot Jul 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

situchan commented Jul 31, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

situchan commented Jul 31, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Regression Test Cases

Uh oh!

situchan commented Aug 2, 2026

Uh oh!

cretadn22 commented Aug 3, 2026

Uh oh!

situchan commented Aug 3, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Aug 3, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Aug 3, 2026

Re-review — the flagged regression is fixed ✅

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Aug 3, 2026

Regression sweep — no new regressions found ✅

Uh oh!

situchan commented Aug 3, 2026

Uh oh!

cretadn22 commented Aug 3, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Aug 4, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Aug 4, 2026

Uh oh!

cretadn22 commented Jul 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Jul 27, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

situchan commented Jul 31, 2026 •

edited

Loading

situchan commented Jul 31, 2026 •

edited

Loading